February 3, 2017

Students have been asked to gather at the NYU Law School’s Vanderbilt Hall on Thursday at 2PM in solidarity against the inclusion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement recruiters in the school’s Public Interest Job Fair. Allowing ICE recruiters on campus is particularly sensitive at this time given President Trump’s recent executive order and NYU’s vague position on Sanctuary Campus status.

IYSSE leaders who spoke at the rallies provided an international socialist perspective, emphasizing that Trump’s attack on immigrants is part of an attack on the entire working class supported by both Democrats and Republicans. Speakers reviewed the danger of war, the terrible social conditions facing workers and youth and the need to break with the Democratic Party and build an independent party of the working class.

Liberals attacked from the left — now, that is one of my favorite subjects:

Nicole, a student at SDSU, said after the meeting that she was particularly happy to hear about the IYSSE’s affiliation with the SEP, stating that the two-party system was a dead end. “You know, we have never had a poor president,” Nicole explained, adding, “What do they know about the interests of the poor?”

By the time you're running for President — at least 35 by constitutional requirement — you should have had enough mental power and industriousness to get at least into the middle class or how could you possibly have what it takes to be President?

Harry Truman, like Abe Lincoln, had tried his luck running a store and the store went bankrupt. A shopkeeper is middle class, not poor, but if the business is terrible, he may lose everything and end up with less than nothing. That makes him economically poor, but his social class is not that of poverty.

I remember the protests in the 1990s here at UW against military recruiters on campus because of the anti-gay policy. The government used spending power bullying to force us to give the military equal access and we fought it in court on free-speech grounds (and lost).

The Nazi Party's precursor, the Pan-German nationalist and anti-Semitic German Workers' Party, was founded on 5 January 1919. By the early 1920s, Adolf Hitler assumed control of the organisation and renamed it the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, NSDAP) to broaden its appeal. [emphasis added]

US Grant was poor both before and after the presidency. Lincoln was poor. He grew up in a log cabin. Reagan, Truman, Nixon, Eisenhower, weren't exactly poor, but they were hardly rich.

Apparently high schools are teaching nothing these days. I know, lets set up post-high school education. We could have large institutions to educate young people. Money should be no object. The kids can borrow $100,000 or $200,000 or more. Whatever it takes Then finally, we would be able to teach them a little history and economics.

The true irony is that these leftist morons who profess such intense solidarity with the poor, fail to recognize that the one engine of sustained economic growth, which has lifted millions out of poverty into the Middle Class is ....(pause for effect) .....western style Capitalism.

Students have been asked to gather at the NYU Law School’s Vanderbilt Hall on Thursday at 2PM in solidarity against the inclusion of Immigration and Customs Enforcement recruiters in the school’s Public Interest Job Fair. Allowing ICE recruiters on campus is particularly sensitive at this time given President Trump’s recent executive order and NYU’s vague position on Sanctuary Campus status. I don't see an update there. What happened?

They don't have an option. They take federal monies and are not permitted to ban federal agencies from recruiting.

These kids are going to become the leaders of this country. We need to shut down colleges NOW and rebuild everything. The faculty has failed by any measure.

“You know, we have never had a poor president,” Nicole explained, adding, “What do they know about the interests of the poor?”

I'd ask the same of her and her family. Because, rest assured, they ain't poor.

I remember the protests in the 1990s here at UW against military recruiters on campus because of the anti-gay policy. The government used spending power bullying to force us to give the military equal access and we fought it in court on free-speech grounds (and lost).

Do you feel that was an unjust decision? Your wording indicates that you still aren't fond of it.

"You know, we have never had a poor president,” Nicole explained, adding, “What do they know about the interests of the poor?”

This reminds me of the old socialists' dilemma of hating the rich while needing income to survive, which usually leads to the realization that they never had a poor man offer them a job. I wonder how Nicole resolves in her own mind how a middle aged person who couldn't, himself, find a path out of poverty is capable of leading a country in prosperity?

"I remember the protests in the 1990s here at UW against military recruiters on campus because of the anti-gay policy. The government used spending power bullying to force us to give the military equal access and we fought it in court on free-speech grounds (and lost)."

The policy wasn't "anti-gay". It was "no gay." The only "anti" was the UW, "anti-military gay policy".No wonder you lost.

Nicole's comment went unchallenged because A. "our reporters" (ain't collectivism grand?), who wrote the article, like what she said and B. "our reporters" are just as ignorant as Nicole. People who don't know what they don't know sure sound like morons to the rest of us.

This young skull full of mush knows nothing of the origins of three very famously poor presidents, although I'm certain she's heard the names Reagan, Clinton and Lincoln before. She has no clue of the grinding poverty all three overcame, and would be very surprised and a great bit wiser if she explored the lives of other presidents. Some day she will regret exposing her ignorance in such a public way.

Back in the 90s or so, after the failure of the Atlantic City casinos, Donald Trump is reported to have said to Marla Maples, upon seeing a homeless person that he was a billion dollars poorer. That's pretty poor.

And ended up in dirt, but in between got pretty wealthy from being in power. Reagan and Lincoln both made something of themselves before going into government. The Clintons made all their riches from being in power, more in the Stalin mold.

The Nazi Party's precursor, the Pan-German nationalist and anti-Semitic German Workers' Party, was founded on 5 January 1919. By the early 1920s, Adolf Hitler assumed control of the organisation and renamed it the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, NSDAP) to broaden its appeal. [emphasis added]

These people don't seem to know what the word socialist means."

The People's Republic of China.

Those who call Communist China a dictatorship don't seem to know what the word republic means.

(More to the point, many don't seem to understand that words don't always mean what those using them want you to think they mean.)

Never a poor president, but quite a few who had been middle class, some barely so. The middle class are always facing the risk of being poor, and they know it. That's why as a rule they are strivers.

I've been able to trace my ancestors on both sides of my family for several centuries. None ever got rich. They moved around a lot. There were no ancestral manors, or even towns. Always moving towards some opportunity or away from some disaster. No safe spaces, except perhaps (for some) a church or a loving family.

“You know, we have never had a poor president,” Nicole explained, adding, “What do they know about the interests of the poor?”

Of course we've had plenty who were born and grew up poor: Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, Eisenhower, Truman, etc.. all the way back to Lincoln and Jackson. Nicole needs to read a little more history.

I'd also argue it is fundamentally unfair for professors and faculty --- who have jobs --- to limit the job options that graduates can choose from.

Also, and this is not small, if you limit certain firms/agencies because you disapprove of what they do, it puts your school on the line to verify that EVERY other firm/agency is clean as the wind-driven snow. You've already shown that you will block groups that are unpleasant from recruiting and that means that any group recruiting was APPROVED by your school.

It'd be a massive headache, if you ask me. But colleges also don't teach their students critical thinking and the mobs certainly don't use it, so you'd get away with it.

The People's Republic of China.

Those who call Communist China a dictatorship don't seem to know what the word republic means.

How many times did Mao stand in an open and free election?

The only difference between Mao (or Stalin) and Hitler is that they worse than Hitler.

Of course we've had plenty who were born and grew up poor: Obama, Clinton, Reagan, Nixon, Johnson, Eisenhower, Truman, etc.. all the way back to Lincoln and Jackson. Nicole needs to read a little more history.

Umm, in what way was Obama born or grew up poor? He most certainly did not.

Those who call Communist China a dictatorship don't seem to know what the word republic means.

It's revealing to see Cook claim labels must be truthful, but only when such pretense helps the left. You'd think he'd be wary of revealing his support for a murderous dictatorship but sometimes the truth slips out. It's hard to hide your beliefs every second.

After reading this article and Nicole's comments, I'm wondering why this Blog and AA give so much space to someone who has yet to accomplish anything in life. Get back to me when she really contributes some value to our society's future. At this point in her life, Nicole is what we used to call a real "bubble head".

(More to the point, many don't seem to understand that words don't always mean what those using them want you to think they mean.)

That's the case for official country names everywhere, I think. The more freedomy-individualistic words in the name (democratic, worker's, people's, republic, etc), the more brutal the dictatorship. The more commanding-conformist words in the name (Kingdom, Union, Commonwealth), the freer the country.

Compare: "United" States of America, "Kingdom" of Denmark, "Commonwealth" of Australia... these relatively free places. The "Democratic" "People's" "Republic" of Korea... has a "Supreme Leader" who's a hereditary dictator-monarch, and who can't be the "president" because his dad is the "Eternal President"... as written in the constitution.

"That's the case for official country names everywhere, I think. The more freedomy-individualistic words in the name (democratic, worker's, people's, republic, etc), the more brutal the dictatorship."

I would say... the more pretentious the name, the worse the regime. E.g. "People's Republic of China" vs. "Republic of China"; "Democratic People's Republic of Korea" vs. "Republic of Korea"; "Bundesrepublik Deutschland" vs "Deutsche Demokratische Republik". The "República de Venezuela" has gone to hell since becoming the "República Bolivariana de Venezuela".

"United" simply signifies a federal structure, which may or may not be oppressive. The "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics", the "United Arab Emirates", and the "Estados Unidos de Mexico" are or were not better or worse because of federalism.